I need lens help 100-400 or 400 5.6?

this is my problem, I've got the 7D ... it came with the 28-135mm I bought the 17-55mm 2.8 and the 70-200mm 2.8L plus a 1.4 TC. all great lenses, but too short for birds/ wildlife. I was thinking about the 400 5.6L or the 100-400mm L. the 400 seems to be sharper by quite a bit at 400mm wide open. I like the idea of the versatility of the 100-400 , but I have the 70-200 for fast in close stuff, and I can add the TC to that to bring it's range out. I just want some help with real world experience. I'm leaning toward the 400 fixed for the IQ , but seeing as I only have one body(7D) I'd have to change lenses depending on the distance. or is there a 3rd party choice that's even better. oh yeah I forgot to add, I'm not made of money so the $1,600.00 is pretty much my tops(unless a few hundred more would put me into the holy grail of lens.

thanks,
Tom

Given that you have a 70-200 already I don't see any point in you getting another zoom, especially when for what you want you'll likely always have the 100-400 at 400 anyway. The downside of the prime is that you're going to lose AF if you put a TC on the 400/5.6.

In all honestly, you're probably going to find the 400 still to short. There are some non-canon options you can check out to get you past 400mm. Rent a 2xTC for your 70-200 and go out shooting. Even at 400mm I think you'll find yourself wishing for more reach.

I owned the 400 f5.6 and it is a really nice lens... hand holdable, and it worked just fine with my tamron 1.4 tc...AF and all. I thought about springing for the 100-400 but the thought of having to send in for cleaning due to pump zoom turned me off. That said, ive seen some amazing results with the 100-400.

As a proud owner of the 100-400 I would recommended going the 400mm route for one reason. As you mentioned, you have other options for ranges less than 400mm and the 100-400 is probably going to be used almost always at 400, I know mine is almost always there. The only downside is the lack of IS but even here I find that my best shots from the 100-400 are when shutter speeds are about 1/1000, well above and reasonable hand held minimum shutter speed.

one other option?

the other thought I had was the 300mm f4, I could add a 2x TC and still have and F8 which could autofocus???

of course... the 100-400mm looks pretty much identical to my 70-200, so I wouldn't have to explain the purchase to my wife!!!

Thumpa wrote in post #12116739
the other thought I had was the 300mm f4, I could add a 2x TC and still have and F8 which could autofocus???

I'm pretty sure the 7D loses AF on over 5.6.

My vote goes to the 100-400. It has IS, which, while older and only rated at 2 stops, is still better than none. Also, having the 70-200 in the bag when you something closer as the bird/animal is moving toward/past you doesn't do you any good.

If your primary, possibly only, goal is to get birds in flight, I would recommend the prime. Otherwise, to deal with changing distances and/or be able to get more "opportunistic" shots, I think the 100-400 is the way to go.

And yes, unless you have a non-reporting TC, you lose AF at f/8 on the 7D (unless you are in Live View)

I taped the pins on my Canon 1.4 II extender and autofocus worked fine with my 400mm f/5.6 on my 40D and 7D. It does crave a lot of light being an f/8 lens though. Focus is slower obviously but you can't beat the quick focus of the 400mm prime by itself.

I will never buy another zoom lens for my own reasons (I do own the 70-200mm f/4L) and I will never sell my 400mm prime even though I own the 500mm f/4L now....the 400mm is that good in my opinion.

I started out with the 70-200mm f/4L, bought the 400mm f/5.6L and last year bought the 500mm f/4L. I wish I had even more focal length than 500mm or even 700mm using the 1.4 extender.

a friend told me to get the 2x III TC, which will give me the equivalent of a 140-400mm f5.6... meaning fast auto-focus with versatility. I picked it up and though I hardly had time to play with it, it seems awesome. the AF is still fast and accurate. so now save my pennies for that 500mm or 600mm in the future

Some reading for you

The AF on the prime is much, much faster than on the 300f4 is w/1.4x. I have both setups. My prime is a bit sharper, the 300f4 is 1.4x more versatile.